TM, I do have a few comments. Let me just say Kumar's lack of IT knowledge is showing.
Kumar:
<<August 21, 2000 – Page 2 of 2
What is happening is that FC has fallen well short of expectations. It has become the victim of dueling standards efforts that have fractured the promise of interoperability and hampered deployment of SANs. A recent poll by eWeek (7/31) indicated that 85% of the companies surveyed have not deployed SANs and about 80% of the respondents either do not intend to or do not know if they will deploy SANs within the next year>>
Most IT managers are still not comfortable with SAN. It is understandable and rightfully so. The correct question should have been 'Does your company intend to add computer/storage capacity?' The answer I bet is closer to 100%. The two main choices are
1. Add new SCSI drives to existing channels. It may reach the upper limit of allowable devices per channel and performance will suffer.
2.To deploy SAN.
The key is how to integrate the old system and the new (SAN) so that new capacity can be added as needed. The SUN, the Hitachi, the HWP, the EMC will be selling additional capacity solution and the solution is FC enable systems which include FC switches. These IT professionals then will have said yes to SAN. It is more or less an after thought IMO. It is like asking someone if he/she is going to buy a SUV and the answer is 'no'. What he/she is unaware of the fact that the only way they can get to where they want to go through these mountains is in a SUV....8 cylinders, quadra-drive, end of story.
Kumar:
<<However, on a tactical note, it appears to be lacking direct sales intelligence. While it talks about being named as the standard SAN switch for Storage service providers like StorageNetworks (STOR), it does not have a direct relationship with them. In other words, Brocade does not determine its own destiny in the market through its own sales organization. >>
I agree that Brocade does not determine its own destiny in the market through its sales organization. Remember, the solution owners are the SUN, HWP , IBM, Hitachi, EMC. Mostly made up of server companies. EMC made it up there because of their sheer size. It brings up another point. Customers seldom ask for a named-brand FC switches. They want a solution for their capacity problem.
Kumar:
<<Brocade’s lack of OEM products at Sun today is an exposure. OEM sales represented 75% of channel mix with the top 10 OEMs representing 80% of the Company’s revenues. Compaq (CPQ-#), a company that lacks any storage strategy, is the largest OEM for Brocade. Brocade faces the loss of revenue tailwind without sponsorship at Sun, the largest OEM opportunity, and the potential that the other OEM programs could be still born due to competitive technology offerings by 1H01.
The Ethernet/IP storage threat is much bigger than Brocade makes it out to be. Brocade likes to talk about WDM in the MAN and IP in the WAN. The real issue is IP everywhere. Why shouldn’t storage be IP also?>> <<· Ethernet/IP SAN solutions for MAN/WAN should begin rolling out in six months>>
When is Kumar going to know that there are no IP interfaces on storage and server devices. IP/storage routing and FC/storage are two totally separate issue. IP/storage will help to promote storage usage. It will encourage more FC or SCSI storage deployment, not hinder it. I do agree, however, that SUN's endorsement of Qlogic will be a strong minus for Brocade.
All IMHO.
KJ |
